Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
In a stay of demand matter, the HC held that the impugned order was defective because the authority fixed the amount payable and instalment schedule without discernible application of mind or a reasoned consideration of relevant factors. Referring to the CBDT stay guidelines, the Court required the stay application to be decided through a speaking order after hearing the taxpayer and considering the Supreme Court decision and the Circular. The stay order was set aside, the matter was remitted for fresh decision on merits, and recovery pursuant to the assessment order was kept in abeyance until reconsideration.
In a stay of demand matter, the HC held that the impugned order was defective because the authority fixed the amount payable and instalment schedule without discernible application of mind or a reasoned consideration of relevant factors. Referring to the CBDT stay guidelines, the Court required the stay application to be decided through a speaking order after hearing the taxpayer and considering the Supreme Court decision and the Circular. The stay order was set aside, the matter was remitted for fresh decision on merits, and recovery pursuant to the assessment order was kept in abeyance until reconsideration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
